Skip to main content

Table 4 Komboka-related characteristics during Participatory Varietal Selection (PVS) and sensory evaluations in Tanzania, Uganda and Burundi

From: The importance of market signals in crop varietal development: lessons from Komboka rice variety

Category

1Tanzania

2Uganda

3Burundi

Release year

2013

2014

2018

Number of varieties tested (including Komboka)

9

10

4

Study sites

Kyela (Mbeya district),

Igunga (Tabora district)

Ifakara (Morogoro district),

Bagamoyo (Coast district),

Dakawa (Morogoro district)

Namulonge

Doho

Olweny

Kibimba

Agoro

Gihanga

Farmers’ matrix ranking for IR05N221

a2nd (1st was TXD 306, an improved local variety)

b1st

c2nd (after Musaruro/IR85260-148, and in same ranking as mugwiza)

Farmers’ on-farm perceptions on agronomic traits of IR05N221

1st (at Kyela and Bagamoyo)

2nd (at Ifakara and Dakawa–1st was Supa at Ifakara site and IR05N499 at Dakawa site)

3rd (at Agoro)

1st, with other two varieties (at Olweny)

2nd (same ranking as Mugwiza rice variety)

Farmers’ perceptions on sensory evaluation (cooking and eating grain characteristics)

Ranked 1st (in Dakawa) and 2nd (in Ifakara and Igunga) in terms of cooking and eating quality, with acceptable grain qualities, specifically soft cooking and good eating taste

Not applicable/unavailable

d4th/least ranking across the four criteria, but was most appreciated for its taste

Researchers’ liked traits

Good performance in moisture stress conditions

Not applicable/unavailable

Suitable for rainfed and irrigated systems

 

Early maturity

  
 

Shows disease free characteristics under natural environments

  

Yield performance

Higher yields (15–30%) under rainfed lowland ecology than all the local checks tested

At all sites, high yields. At Dakawa high yield performance (6.73 t/ha) when compared to local check, Supa (4.37 t/ha) but non-significant difference to improved local check, TXD 306 (7.20 t/ha)

Higher yields (15–30%) under rainfed lowland ecology than all the local checks tested

Overall/ across all sites yield performance trials at 5.96 t/ha:

In 2012: 2nd highest (after WITA-9) at 6.5 t/ha

In 2013a: 3rd highest (after GSR0057 and K85) at 4.52 t/ha

In 2013b: highest at 6.85 t/ha

Average yield in 2018 at Gihanga Research station at 7.1 t/ha:

Non-significant difference with the check: Mugwiza (7.29 t/ha) and Komboka (7.10 t/ha)

Maturity period

Matures 7–14 days earlier than the most popular variety SARO 5 hence saving water and also avoiding the later stage drought

Matures 28–30 days earlier than K85 hence saving water and also avoiding the later stage drought

 
  1. 1Application for National Performance Trials (NPTs) of IR05N221 and IR03A262 seed release in Tanzania 2012 by Agricultural Research Institute (ARI)–KATRIN by Rice Breeder Nkori J. M Kibanda
  2. 2Variety Release Application–Submission to the variety release committee for the release of five lowland rice varieties in 2o14 by National Agricultural Research Organization (NARO)
  3. 3Confirmation trial’s report of Distinction, Homogeneity and Stability (DHS) and Agronomic and Technological Value (VAT) of three new rice varieties from IRRI-ESA at Gihanga station in 2018, National Office for Seed Control and Certification (ONCCS)
  4. a,b,cThe ranking among rice varieties was based on 11 traits: 1- high tillering, 2-plant height, 3-number of grains/panicle, 4-long and big panicle, 5- aromatic, 6- taste, 7-good milling quality, 8- ease to thresh, 9- lodging resistance, 10- time to maturity, 11-resistance to pests and diseases
  5. dThe four sensory criteria taken into account were: (i) paddy (visual)—Shape and size of the grain, no lesions on the grain (indication of diseases in the field) (ii) White rice (visual): shape and colour, broken rate, approximate milling recovery (iii) Cooked rice (visual): shape, size and colour of the cooked rice, volume increase after cooking, wet or dry after cooking (iv) Taste: aroma, smell, taste and flavour. The distribution of sensory preferences among samples was determined by use of frequency tables and the significant difference determined by chi square test